Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. 300,000 items to help build your collection! Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin AuctionsSpecializing in Modern Numismatics Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads and the security checks. It's Free!

Are The 2022 Quarters Lighter Than Usual?

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Replies: 17 / Views: 19,762Next Topic
Page: of 2
Pillar of the Community
cladking's Avatar
United States
2285 Posts
 Posted Today  27M ago  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add cladking to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
@cladking I also have this information but have been unable to verify my source. Do you have a source?


I think I read the story in Coin World or Numismatic News back in 1999. I never actually checked the weight to confirm it but at that time there was a large discrepancy between the weight of 1965 and 1998 quarters. I believe it exceeded 1.5% but never checked this either.

I did assemble a few rolls of heavily worn quarters and noted the complete rolls "appeared" to be six or seven coins short because they were so much thinner.

Thin quarters just aren't seen much any longer. I believe they were sorted out in '08. The coins don't really wear much any longer as they are eroded away by collisions with machines. They are scratched more than worn away by rubbing.

I used to add coins to my most heavily worn set of clad quarters very frequently but it's been many years since a single coin has been added. Once in a while I see one that's very worn and not too banged up but when I compare it to the one in the set it is much less worn and far more banged up.

The mint does a fairly good job of making new coin the same thickness but some BU rolls like the '74 easily fit in the plastic tubes and other dates like the '88-D (IMS) won't even hold "38" coins. Some years are thicker and some years they have trouble with what they call "finning" where the rims squeeze between the collar and die creating a very thick coin. Some dates like the '84-P have very shallow rims and never fin but then the coins quickly acquire marking because the rim is too low to protect it. I haven't seen a nice '84-P in circulation since the mid-'90's; they're usually a mess even before they get to AU-/XF+.

The article did not speculate on why they reduced the thickness of the substrate, merely that they did. I believe it was to reduce the range of weight of circulating quarters by 1% once the '88 to '98 quarters were worn down a little. Instead of a 2.5% range it was reduced to a 1.5% range. Removing the worn coins merely affected the average rather than the range.

Data is hard to come by so much of it is deduction. I've talked to the FED but never seem to remember to ask all the important questions. Of course some of the people at the FED have narrow expertise so can't answer every question anyway. They are much more forthcoming than commercial interests who treat you like you're trying to case the joint.

This all occurred back during a period that the mint was finally informing the hobby about what they had been doing during all those years that nobody cared what they were doing. No one collected coins or cared about their quality or distribution from '65 top '98 so the mint wasn't talking. They had only recently admitted that mint set coins were different than the circulating coins because they were better made with new dies. It was also the year they discontinued the souvenir mint set program without ever telling anyone mintages had crashed to almost nothing at all.

I expected all these revelations to spark modern coin collecting but instead it propelled the states quarters through the roof. They were so popular mintages became astronomical!!! But nobody noticed there weren't many nice looking '84-P quarters in any grade.
Time don't fly, it bounds and leaps.
Edited by cladking
Today 24M ago
Pillar of the Community
Pete2226's Avatar
United States
3362 Posts
 Posted Today  11M ago  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Pete2226 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:

I think I read the story in Coin World or Numismatic News back in 1999.


If you remember any more about the story that would be helpful for a key word search, let me know. I want to try to find it! This narrows my avenues a bit! Thanks!

It doesn't really matter for any concerns I saw raised earlier in the thread, since 1% thickness difference will not take it outside of tolerance...I just would like to track down the information!
  Replies: 17 / Views: 19,762Next Topic
Page: of 2

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.21 seconds to rattle this change. Forums